MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522332879 · doi:10.5539/ass.v12n10p152

Towards Ethical Framework for Personal Care Robots: Review and Reflection

2016· article· en· W2522332879 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nazanin Mansouri, Khaled Goher

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotConsequentialismIndependence (probability theory)Health careDignityPopulationEngineering ethicsSociologyComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPolitical scienceLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>In recent decades, robots have been used noticeably at various industries. Autonomous robots have been embedded in human lives especially in elderly and disabled lives. Elderly population is growing worldwide significantly; therefore there is an increased need of personal care robots to enhance mobility and to promote independence. A great number of aging and disabled hold appeals for using robots in daily routine tasks as well as for various healthcare matters. It is essential to follow a proper framework in ethics of robot design to fulfill individual needs, whilst considering potential harmful effects of robots. This paper primarily focuses on the existing issues in robot ethics including general ethics theories and ethics frameworks for robots. Consequentialism ethics will be recommended to be applied in robot ethics frameworks.</p>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.389 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207